Moveon.org Protests GE/government Collusion

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I opened a thread about the outrageous story of America's largest corporation GE not paying any taxes on their $14 billion U.S. profits and is also the largest exporter of American jobs overseas. I was pointing to the hypocrisy on the Left for not going after THIS corporation that has gotten itself snug with the Obama Administration. Now, in a bid for fairness, I'm posting an update. Former Sen. Russ Feingold and Moveon.org are now calling for GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt to resign.

I can no longer say that the Left is giving this story a pass.

MoveOn posts - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

[RipplecutBuddha]

imagine the reaction if Bush were still in office.....

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

You trying to get this thread locked too, RB?

[PrinceofLight2000]

Hardcore socialists vs. fascist-esque corporatism by a quasi-socialist ideologue administration.

I don't mind it, it's just ideological in-fighting on the left. Fun for us conservatives to watch.

Also, I laugh at anyone who tries to say fascism is a hallmark of conservatism. Just because it's to the right of communism doesn't make it right of center.

Edited April 3, 2011 by PrinceofLight2000

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Hardcore socialists vs. fascist-esque corporatism by a quasi-socialist ideologue administration.

I don't mind it, it's just ideological in-fighting on the left. Fun for us conservatives to watch.

Also, I laugh at anyone who tries to say fascism is a hallmark of conservatism. Just because it's to the right of communism doesn't make it right of center.

The truth is, fascism isn't an exact fit anywhere in the American political spectrum. The Germans were National Socialists and many of the strict controls on the means of production were straight out of the Communist Manifesto. I rather draw the lines between government based on the belief in God and one based on atheism. The atheists including Hitler, Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot were responsible for murdering 120 million people in the 20th century, a scale of bloodshed without precident.

[PrinceofLight2000]

The truth is, fascism isn't an exact fit anywhere in the American political spectrum. The Germans were National Socialists and many of the strict controls on the means of production were straight out of the Communist Manifesto. I rather draw the lines between government based on the belief in God and one based on atheism. The atheists including Hitler, Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot were responsible for murdering 120 million people in the 20th century, a scale of bloodshed without precident.

Let me just clarify that being an atheist doesn't automatically make someone a murderous totalitarian psychopath.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Let me just clarify that being an atheist doesn't automatically make someone a murderous totalitarian psychopath.

No, but the most prolific murderers in history have been atheists.

[RipplecutBuddha]

You trying to get this thread locked too, RB?

Not at all.....just making an observation...*polishes his halo*

[talisyn]

Well....if anyone besides me have been reading much on the pro-union websites they'd know...nvm I'm fairly certain what I'd say wouldn't be heard

[HEthePrimate]

Well, this "leftist" never did approve of the GE thing. I do like Obama and think he's done a lot of good things, but that doesn't mean I agree with everything he does. Immelt was a bad idea.

I think it's pretty silly for people to either worship the ground Obama walks on (though I've never met anybody who actually does), or think that everything Obama does is wrong. Likewise, I don't think conservatives are always wrong, and I don't think liberals are always right (or vice versa). This whole "us vs. them" mentality is STOOPID, and I'm getting tired of the pointless potshots and all the bitter divisiveness.

P.S. I just read Pam's post on "Conversations concerning Obama." Let it be noted that even though I said that I like Obama, I also pointed out that I don't agree with him on everything. Besides, I'm only one member of these forums, and don't think anything I say could be construed as representing the entire organization.

Any post that speaks favorably about one candidate, even in a religious context, can be construed as indirect intervention in the election process. While journalists are presently exempt from this provision, bloggers and forum-members are not.

Question: Does the above quote mean that we are not allowed to speak favorably about a candidate, but are allowed to speak unfavorably about him? Is that really fair? Is that truly neutral? The reason I ask is because I've seen a LOT of negative comments about Obama in these forums, and allowing those while disallowing favorable commentary would demonstrate a clear bias.

Just sayin'... You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

Edited April 13, 2011 by HEthePrimate

[pam]

Obviously you didn't read everything that I posted. What I posted also states:

You may not use the site to show support, endorse, oppose or sanction any candidate

Besides, I'm only one member of these forums, and don't think anything I say could be construed as representing the entire organization.

Do you honestly think YOU would ever be the ONLY one?

[HEthePrimate]

Obviously you didn't read everything that I posted. What I posted also states:

Ah, thanks for pointing that out!

Do you honestly think YOU would ever be the ONLY one?

Obviously you didn't read my post very carefully, either. I didn't say I was the ONLY one--I said I was just one person (of many).

Anyway, I didn't mean to offend. Just wanted clarification. Thanks for your reply.

[pam]

Ahh but you said you were only one member...but it only takes one member to post something and then another responds and another..well you get the idea. It only has to start with one. :)

Edited April 13, 2011 by pam